Steve Davis: Yeah. Doug?
Doug Williamson: Thanks. I appreciate the question. I think I have been here seven weeks now. So I am still taking the time to understand the — fully the existing pipeline and its potential let alone look to the future. I can tell you that I am very excited to be at ACADIA. I have spent most of my career in neuroscience clinical research and I think it’s one of the most difficult areas of drug development. So one of the things that appeals to me about ACADIA is the focus and the persistence this company has always shown in taking on, I think, the challenges of developing novel treatments for people suffering from brain disorders where, of course, there’s significant unmet need. So I don’t really want to get into detail about gaps or where we are headed, except that we will be developing over the — shortly in the future, we will be developing more clarity around what direction we are headed, but I can’t give you any more detail on that right now.
Steve Davis: Let me just add one annotation. Yeah. Mark Schneyer mentioned in his remarks that, there are some deals that we have done that we don’t disclose. So when we do a deal, we determine from an SEC perspective, do we need to disclose it, and we do, of course, we disclose it. If we don’t, sometimes we take programs on and want to get to a certain destination or answer a certain question before talking publicly we get from those programs. So, as Doug alluded to, as we progress this year, we will talk more about those programs that we haven’t disclosed yet.
Jay Olson: That’s great. Thanks for taking the question.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of David Hoang from SMBC Nikko.
David Hoang: Hi. Thanks for the update and taking my question. So I just had a follow-up or two on the in-office channel for NUPLAZID in PDP. How long do you think or do you have any estimate on how long you think the presentation of the real-world evidence will take before that becomes reflected to any extent in script volumes? And do you have any sense of the decreased patient start — patient visits, is there any feedback from the prescriber end as to what they are seeing and if they expect those number of visits to rebound?
Steve Davis: Brendan, do you want to take that?
Doug Williamson: Sure and thanks for the question. As you would expect, we ever since the beginning of the pandemic, we have been paying very close attention to what we think are leading indicators for patient return to in-office — to the in-office setting. We saw a dramatic rise in telemedicine, obviously, but that’s largely gone away. What we have seen, however, is we are still down double digits for inpatient volumes of visits. And that’s a function of two things. One, I think there was a mortality in the PD patient population during the pandemic. We see that in a surrogate marker for carbidopa/levodopa scripts. One would expect carbidopa/levodopa as a treatment to rise with an incident population just as you would in the broader community.
Over the pandemic, use of carbidopa-levodopa was still down about 5%. That’s sort of the top of the funnel for the treatment of patients. So what we are looking for is and I think what we have started to see is some stabilization in those in-office visits. What we want to see is ARISE . ARISE helps us in two ways. One, we believe, as I said, early days on the real-world evidence, but we do know that we are getting time with physicians, they find the information compelling and there’s an opportunity for us to use that as a real platform for differentiation of NUPLAZID versus the atypical antipsychotics that preceded it. The second is the audience to treat and if we can get more patients to return to the office, I think, that combination is very helpful in the midterm and longer term for NUPLAZID growth.
